Countless unica have claimed that the WoT matchmaker/RNG systems dictate far too much in this game, specifically that after a few wins their shots start missing more, doing less damage, not penning easy targets, etc. Or, consider those times where after a streak of five or so great games (where you won and got near top score) you’re then put on the team which has 5 less of the top tier tanks as the other side. Matchmaker is not broken, nor is RNG, both are working as intended™.
It's time to put those tinfoil hats on! In actuality, RNG/MM are not random at all, but rather, they are meticulously programmed handicapping systems whose intent is to boost the pubtards closer to average stats and smash down upon the unica which begin to do too well. This genius business strategy serves two purposes.
1) It gives the pubtards just enough undeserved wins and perfect max damage snapshot penetrations in order to make them think they’re doing something right, which keeps the player base high. The same applies to preventing unicum shots from killing certain pubtards who have performed too poorly for too long. This has been made easier to do with the alleged accuracy sigma changes brought by the 8.6 update. Any decent player with a mediocre knowledge of algebra II knows this update is a lie. I noticed the sigma changes to become null about three weeks after the patch came out.
2) This also serves to make sure everyone benefits from a premium account. If pubtards are not earning enough credits, the 1.5x multiplier is multiplying a near-zero number, and the noobs will still not earn enough credits to buy moar tanks. Conversely speaking, if unica can consistently perform so well that they can avoid the need to buy a premium account while comfortably playing their end-tier tanks, they too do not benefit from the 1.5x credit multiplier.
By keeping both ends of the spectrum closer to the average, WG not only maximizes its player base in order to attain all those record-breakers, but it forces all players to benefit from their premium account.
What I’ve presented to you so far is simply a TL;DR of Gevlon’s studies and experiments, which I’ve tested myself using low-tier light tank suiscouting, then playing a higher tier tank and haphazardly aiming for ez high rolling pens. I would highly recommend reading his five part series, which is as follows:
1) http://greedygoblin....duction-and.htm
2) http://greedygoblin....and-unucky.html
3) http://greedygoblin....ming-train.html
4) http://greedygoblin....omy-stupid.html
5) http://greedygoblin....at-exploit.html
Now, before the hate-train takes off, I do want to say that I respect this as a business model and understand that WG must make money somehow; however, I do not respect the fact that WG is tricking its player base into believing that their matches are “random” and that skill, the tank, and luck decide a brawl between two tankers, when plenty often it’s RNG that predetermines who will live or die. Can you honestly tell me that one of the worst players in the game can destroy one of the best players in a head to head of the same tier when “luck” is not such a factor? Or that an artillery piece with 300 wn7 can routinely snapshot a dodging unicum batchat for its entire health pool?
TL;DR of the above TL;DR of Gevlon's teachings is that the WoT MM/RNG system serves to handicap the playerbase, bringing baddies closer to par and smashing down on unica so that more people will play the game and everyone is forced onto a performance level where they will benefit from buying a premium account. "Luck" decides what team you'll be on, what the enemy team will be, where both sides will spawn (which leads to the lemming rushes), where your shot lands, if your shot pens, if your penning shot does damage, and how much damage your penning shot does. This is a large margin for WG to manipulate, and so they have.Not Newcomer related.There is a 50 battle limit to encourage people to play the game, the newcomer section separate from this limit in order for new players to ask questions. It's not here for people to post non Newcomer related conspiracy theories. Your argument boils down to "the game makes people do better against me". Time and time again people who make this claim are asked to explain people above and below whatever "average win ratio" we apparently keep people at and it can't be explained. People who make this "rigged MM" claim can't even agree what win ratio we're supposed to force you to be. It's always just "I should be better that what I really am" or "It's not my fault my results are what they are"It's been a while since anyone has brought up these posts. You're playing a team game with 14 random players in your team, and 15 random players in the other team. Your skill level/stats has zero impact on how the teams are selected. Moving to Off-topic section.- Ectar
EDIT: Not sure how to reply to a moderator post other than editing like so, so... You ask how it can be explained that people attain much higher winrates than others? Most do know, triple-platooning skilled players in easily-carried times of the day on tanks that are "OP" for their tier is one way. Another, as the "idiot links" describe is by playing (or platooning) tanks whose lowest penetration margin is still well above any angled armor he might encounter, such as the Marder II, so manipulation of RNG would be far more blatant.
As far as winrates below the marginal average go, suiscoutters, AFKers, teamkillers, pond-divers, etc. all have a harder time being consistently boosted by MM/RNG. They do not, however, attain very far below a 40% overall winrate. The worst players in the game still maintain an average winrate of just slightly below the average, and the best players in the game can only maintain average winrates of just slightly over the average. In any other highly popular matched system or MMO, highly skilled players have exceedingly higher winrates than very bad players and a corresponding lower newcomer percentage, but that's not even my main argument.
My main conspiracy question is how to explain consistently missed/non-damage-pen/low-roll-that-lets-the-baddy-live-with-10hp from unicums to baddies, and consistently landed highroll/crazy-weakspot-heat-seeking-shots-on-the-move from baddies to unicums.Even excluding the obviously flawed MM system, RNG plays such a consistently interesting factor in WoT.
I would love to be provided with counter-evidence.
Re-EDIT: Since the mean mod has moved it to this section I cannot post replies to any of you, other than meticulously addressing you by editing the OP. Glad you're all enjoying my tinfoil hat theory.
@Arkhell
I'm not entirely sure how someone with as much skill and experience in this game as you hasn't noticed any trends or tendencies like the above mentioned. It took me some time to realize these trends... about 9,000 overall battles. At that point I was running a 1700 overall wn7 but a 2800 60day wn7, and I really began to notice red players landing wild unaimed shots on me consistently about that time. In return I could not seem to hit anywhere near the center of my reticule while returning fire.
Oh well. As a mathematician this makes perfect sense to me, especially when I watch shot after shot hit the outer (allegedly 5% chance with new sigma) part of my reticule while fully zoomed on near-death bads. If anything I'm glad some of you enjoyed the laugh.

Absolutely agree with the part that luck and RNG has too important role in this game.

It's mostly RNG that decides who wins. Especially damage rolls. For example, in my M48 Patton which has 390 average damage, I rarely see above 400 while when i get hit, it is mostly close to the max damage roll. I can get over random penetration and accuracy, but the huge damage spread really bothers me.

Absolutely agree with the part that luck and RNG has too important role in this game.

It's mostly RNG that decides who wins. Especially damage rolls. For example, in my M48 Patton which has 390 average damage, I rarely see above 400 while when i get hit, it is mostly close to the max damage roll. I can get over random penetration and accuracy, but the huge damage spread really bothers me.

There's too much random and luck factor.

I agree. I think some of this could be solved by lowering the margins or making tanks only hit for their written penetration/damage, instead of having extreme sides for RNG to roll to.

Absolutely agree with the part that luck and RNG has too important role in this game.

It's mostly RNG that decides who wins. Especially damage rolls. For example, in my M48 Patton which has 390 average damage, I rarely see above 400 while when i get hit, it is mostly close to the max damage roll. I can get over random penetration and accuracy, but the huge damage spread really bothers me.

There's too much random and luck factor.

Indeed, when I'm facing a baddie in tanks that would deal equal damage the baddie will usually hit above average while I hit below average damage...

I agree. I think some of this could be solved by lowering the margins or making tanks only hit for their written penetration/damage, instead of having extreme sides for RNG to roll to.

Exactly. Either reduce the damage and penetration spread to 10-15% MAX or remove it completely. I want the skill to decide the outcome of battle, not unlucky / lucky RNG rolls where i hit an enemy that has 300 health with 390 damage gun and i inflict 295 damage. My actual average damage on most tanks is below the stated average damage.

Isn't point (2) now outdated with the welcome sea change thats's occuring with players incomes who perform well?

Previously there was a diminishing return on effort and resources used to win or damage opponents,
now there is are added incentives for players to perform well during specials and events.
eg) top 3 damage dealers get credit bonus win or lose

When this was written on the site cited (May 2013) this may have been valid, I would have to farm games in a premium tank to subsit my high tier games but now in August the credit incentives for actually perfoming well are now evolving for the better.

Isn't point (2) now outdated with the welcome sea change thats's occuring with players incomes who perform well?

Previously there was a diminishing return on effort and resources used to win or damage opponents,
now there is are added incentives for players to perform well during specials and events.
eg) top 3 damage dealers get credit bonus win or lose

When this was written on the site cited (May 2013) this may have been valid, I would have to farm games in a premium tank to subsit my high tier games but now in August the credit incentives for actually perfoming well are now evolving for the better.

Yes, these missions do add profitability, but you just claimed to farm premium tanks, meaning argument #2 doesn't apply to you. If you already use a premium account then you're a paying customer, and WG will keep you that way with this handicap.

There's defo something funny going on in this game I will give you that..also with this anniversary bonus for the 300k..when I'm doing well the game will start having connection problems and boot me from games even tho my Internet speed is fine acting like some sort of deterrent to stop you playing...also I don't think all tanks are real players anymore..I noticed this after around 8.5-8.6 ish and would bet money they are AI controlled just by the way some tanks act on the battlefield...

Really mate? I have met a lot under 40% players and those above 60%.
Lot of BS here, take a look at good clans, only random parametres are gun wise and random players, a good player will overcome those random parametres by using a little more that thing that sits in your head for no reason in most players.
The simpler you think the more ovbious reasons are, put your tin-foil hat off.
2 link to prove my pointKICK ASS MatchesCrap players

...and the small spread of w/r is easily explained by the fact that there are FOURTEEN OTHER PLAYERS affecting the team performance in every match (well... maybe 12-13 actual players, some seem sub-human) so even the worst performer is not going to drop to a tiny w/r. Simply by being on randomly selected teams they obviously have around 40% ish chance of winning regardless of their performance.

What I think is that its the players that make your team lose. I been on teams were for some reason players form a lemming train and walk into the enemy's shells and die, I have seem players on my team driving heavy's going into the valley on lake with no hope of ever coming out alive, plus I have seem top tank camping behind arty while he is needed and because of this we loose.

It all comes down too the players on your team, sometimes the team gels and other well. might as well drown in the river. So I don't think the game is rigged.

lol that moment that someone quote's the tinfoil hat article's we've been laughing about for month's as truth is the moment I can go to bed satisfied i've seen my daily amount of fail.

Thanks OP you made my day, have a good one suiscouting and haphazardly shooting into tanks you might penetrate ones in a blue moon with a lucky pen roll and bouncing 20 shots in a row wasting all your "free cash"...... seriously....

do us all a favor and post with you main account so we can laugh and point at you, don't hide behind a straw man account.

most people that believe this stuff are bad at the game but think themselves to be good at it, so it must be the system keeping them down. no you are not good at the game, you're bad and you should feel bad for believing in this drivel.